I like what Godo and Shadow Minister said..... nothing much more needs to be said.

I am grateful for the opportunity to receive Sellick's thoughts and to hear others responses to his thoughts. I am challenged by the concepts of reason and faith and how they play out in everyday life. PP asks, What is Truth? not What is The Truth? Hair splitting perhaps but something to ponder when we examine morals and ethics and a relationship beyond ourselves. Sellick is a thinking individual, calling us to question and explore. That he does so in a Christian context is a plus for me because I believe Christianity calls us to step outside ourselves. As a parent, I struggle with morality and the "humanising of humanity." I am not sure Sellick provides any answers to this dilemma in his article, but at least he is raising the issue for us to consider in a constructive forum. Thank you.

Of course once you abdicate the responsibility for your own actions then you can claim any extraneous influence as the source or reason of your behaviour.
Everyone is, at any time in their life, in charge of their own actions.
The judgement of good or not good is not one of morals, but is innate to each and every sentient being.
There is no need for such fancy human thought constructs as religion or god.
Once subscribed to such beliefs, one is on the slippery path of exclusivity, self-righteousness and condescension.
The ordinary human mind is a very gullible entity and the dangers are always that any dogma, doctrine or belief system will cloud the issues and referential thinking will be the ultimate arbiter for ones actions, rather than the apparent merits that present us with every choice we are faced with.

I see that the writer has, regretfully, ignored my suggestion that he offer himself as the first Aussie martyr.
Please do it soon, Pete - the constant need to replace keyboards that have been covered in vomit is sending me broke.

Peter, one of your best pieces I believe.

Godo, where you see intellectual contortions I find echoes of my own experience in the voice of another writer. Peter says “God is truth”, but he is not demanding that readers accept it simply because he says so. He writes that “Christianity is a practice …” The practice can bring an ongoing experience that “transforms the individual by situating him in the story of God.” It is left to each person to decide whether to try the practice seriously in order to test the assertion. Logical argument without that experience is a sterile waste of time.

Terra, thanks for your very thoughtful and provocative suggestions.

Socratease deplores “myths” upheld by the church. We all need myths! Myths are not lies, mistakes or idle fancies. Myth is the narrative pathway to spiritual reality, just as empirical facts provide science with a basis for discovery. We can contemplate and evaluate a myth through discussion and find useful new interpretations. It seems to me very like the way a scientist may re-evaluate a theory by looking at the raw data in a different way. And just as science breaks new ground with the discovery of new facts, so spiritual enquiry may find a new myth that takes us into a new era. Revelation did not stop with the writing of biblical scripture, but rather continues through the generations. But sorry, I'm wandering off the topic...

Gymn-Fish, why bother to enter the forum if you don't intend to discuss the article? Spewing a thoughtless emotional reaction helps no one. This happens too often in posts related to Peter's articles.

Thank you, Crasby. What a perfect rescuing of this comments section. Mr Sellick, I always look forward to your thoughts and am glad to receive them. I find it a trial to read most of the comments, i.e. to express compassion for these comments. My moralistic side would want the editor to not bother with these. I won't be reading the comments anymore but just would like you, Mr Sellick, to know how much I appreciate your articles. Perhaps I am a moralistic, small minded prig, but I don't need these kinds of nihilisitc thoughts.